Posted on 06/17/2006 8:42:22 AM PDT by marc costanzo
Considering you think it is acceptable to accuse someone of "enjoying" a loved one's death, then quibble about the meaning of "enjoy", and then give tacit approval to vulgar suggestions about another's sexual morals, I'm rather glad I don't fit you criteria for "intellectual honesty."
Yes, I was thinking about this as I drove home from work, and I think I could evaluate this fairly since I am unwilling to approve of Ann Coulter's tactics in spite of the fact that she's on my side.
You are dismissed.
The Playboy comment was obviously meant as a means to extricate himself from the hole he (she?) had dug.
Good for you. See tag line.
you = your
What, you weren't aware that Ann Coulter said that?
I guess I will have to buy her book soon. I haven't read any excerpts about what she is saying about evolution.
I am not a creationist, however I do believe that evolution requires leaps of faith similar to religion. Whether or not you believe evolution to be the best theory or not, it is still a theory, and requires us to be making best guesses to complete the theory. The scientist in me thinks that Evolution should be highly considered, but I do not agree that closing the debate as liberalism seems to require is correct. In this, I see the religion in the requirement for complete consensus. Let other theories arise, and better yet, perhaps decide not to decide yet.
Richard Feynman, one of my personal heros, had a great view of uncertainty. He said:
"I don't have to know an answer. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things; by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose— which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn't frighten me."
No...drank the MSM Kool-Aid, did you?
alrighty...then nevermind.
How embarrassing for you to say something that ridiculous.
"Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy." -- Ann Coulter, Godless
Having read your tagline, I'll await an apology.
Your failed argument is based on a definition of enjoy that is different than the one Ann used. Your attempt to attribute to her what she did not in fact do is akin to you putting words in her mouth.
That places you in the intellectually dishonest camp or woefully ignorant. Which one? You chose.
Ah, yes, to "quibble"
Definitions of quibble on the Web:
- petty argument; nit-picking. After some underhanded golf shenanigans in The Dentist, Fields tells his partner not to "quibble" about it. www.louisville.edu/~kprayb01/WCWords.html
- evade the truth of a point or question by raising irrelevant objections
- an evasion of the point of an argument by raising irrelevant distinctions or objections
- argue over petty things; "Let's not quibble over pennies" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
So, the actual meanings of words don't matter to you or the debate, so long as you are emotionally "on the right side?" The rational of the hopeless liberal. We have now established you intellectual bona fides.
and then give tacit approval to vulgar suggestions about another's sexual morals,
No, I just chose to ignore your idiotic attempt to divert from the "inconvenient truth," as your sainted AlGore would say.
I'm rather glad I don't fit you criteria for "intellectual honesty."
You don't know the meaning of "is," let alone either "intellectual" or "honesty."
I repeat, you are dismisseed.
You are also now completely discredited, debunked, deflated, exploded, punctured and otherwise proved wrong.
You never engaged the argument, therefore you concede the argument. You lose.
You know, when you have to spend so much time telling us what the definition of "is", is, or, rather that "enjoy" means this, rather than that, it is you who have lost the argument.
If you have to explain it, it didn't work.
Do you laugh at a joke if it has to be explained to you?
I think Ann chose to use the word "enjoy" just as deliberately as Newsweek chose that particular headline. To think otherwise is, well, naive.
Do you really think that it is consistent to use the word "enjoy" meaning "benefit from" instead of "derive pleasure from" and then go make the Playboy comment? Do you think Ann is really being sensitive to the poor widows' feelings? Of course not! The attempt to water-down Coulter's rhetoric by saying, "Well, she didn't mean enjoy enjoy, she just meant enjoy," is just an attempt to assuage one's conscience. At least it shows that Ann Coulter's most avid fans feel some pricklings at her most venemous attacks.
See post 156. You are not being honest in equivocating over "enjoy." Bite the bullet--Ann Coulter said "enjoy" and she meant it.
Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy." -- Ann Coulter, Godless
Having read your tagline, I'll await an apology.
I know exactly what Ann wrote. In your 146 post you jumped to the wrong assumption that I didn't know what Ann wrote. Now you've compounded your error.
I'm waiting for you to admit your error of jumping to the wrong conclusion and then compounding your error. I need no apology from you. Nor do I want an apology from you because it would be meaningless.
My tag line holds it's ground. Always. You did it to yourself.
"Enjoy" does not mean what many people think it means. However, here she does mean they perversely take pleasures in the fame that their husband's death has brought them.
"Enjoy" does not mean what many people think it means. However, here she does mean they perversely take pleasures in the fame that their husband's death has brought them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.